Not a solution for all . .

Post #77,548 by Andrew Grygus 1/28/03 11:04:38 AM Reply	Not a solution for all . . . . especially in the small business world, and small business is most business in the U.S.. The main computer system is put in to run primarily a single business management software package. Here we run head on into the phrase, "We only support Red Hat Linux". It is an unfortunate fact that small business has neither the expertise nor the time and money to go up against their software vendor's refusal to support their packages on any but their chosen platform, no matter how well it runs on others. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #77,583 by kmself 1/28/03 1:44:19 PM Reply	It's probably 99% There's little that can't run just as happily on another GNU/Linux\r\ndistro as Red Hat. Particularly if you hold yourself to standard\r\nservices: file, print, mail, web (:80 or :443), DNS, VPN, databases,\r\netc. There's no need to look outside a standard distro for any of\r\nthis. \r\n\r\n Where there is an application which specifies itself to be\r\n"Red Hat only": \r\n\r\n \r\n Watch out. "Only runs on..." is code for "we don't honor open\r\nstandards or test in wide environments". Such applications often lead\r\nto problems down the road in upgrading or modifying the base system.\r\nYou're better off elsewhere. \r\n\r\n In all likelihood, it will run without trouble on another\r\ndistribution. \r\n\r\n If tweakage is required, for major applications (Oracle,\r\nSAS, etc.), you'll likely find copious and detailed notes on deployment\r\non other platforms. \r\n\r\n LSB ensures that there is a flat base for all GNU/Linux\r\ndistros. Debian isn't currently certified, but it's very (or fully)\r\ncompliant with the `lsb` package. Again, if the vendor is\r\nbuilding to standards (and they damned well should), operating under\r\nanother environment shouldn't be an issue. \r\n\r\n It's possible (and perhaps advisable) to set up an RH-only\r\nenvironment for specific critical apps. Frankly I'd suspect this to be\r\nmore likely the case with large firms (who can throw a few hundred grand\r\non a problem) more than your posited small business. There are also\r\nways to do this, via chroot and uml, without additional HW expenditure.\r\nThis also provides the benefit of shielding the RH system behind a more\r\nreadily secured alternative. \r\n\r\n "Supported" is code for "we'll offset some of your costs". My\r\nexperience with RH and Debian is that I would spend far more time\r\nwrestling with all other aspects of a RH distro than I would benefit\r\nfrom the "it just works" aspect of Debian, even with the additional cost\r\nof managing an additional package myself. From a total cost standpoint,\r\nDebian wins. Your clients might or might not realize this, I would\r\nstructure my own rates to reflect this fact though. \r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n I can understand vendors wanting to restrict their support costs. I\r\nthink the vendor-specific distro support thing is ultimately\r\nshortsighted. It will cost marketshare. \r\n --\r\n Karsten M. Self [link\|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com\|kmself@ix.netcom.com]\r\n [link\|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/\|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]\r\n What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?\r\n [link\|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/\|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.\r\n \r\n Keep software free. Oppose the CBDTPA. Kill S.2048 dead.\r\n[link\|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html\|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html]\r\n
Post #77,587 by Andrew Grygus 1/28/03 2:08:54 PM Reply	Of course it'll run fine on other distros . . . . but business management software has "idiosyncracies" which require help from the publisher. The problem is at least as bad in small business as in midsize and up. An example is a client who refurbishes Nortel telephone systems. He uses an accounting program from Data Pro (Infinity Power) with custom forms and other minor mods. Moving to a different package would be traumatic for the company. When it was necessary to migrate from the DOS/Network version (the new 32-bit recompile to support XP/2000 was way too slow compared to the 16-bit version), we set up the Linux host version with terminal emulation. The client already had been using a Linux Samba server running Caldera Linux. When Data Pro found out we were on Caldera, they flat out refused to honor a paid-up support contract because it wasn't on Red Hat. Software companies will grasp any straw to deny support. I've even had them deny support for database problems because we were using a different terminal emulator than they recommend. They said that had to be the cause of the data indexing problem. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #77,598 by boxley 1/28/03 2:39:14 PM Reply	I have run into the same issues on support contracts even had one assclown tell me that because we had changed from BNC to cat5 was why his software was failing and we breached the support contract by making the change. thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] "The Mafia was preferable to the state, because it survived by providing services people actually wanted" Murray Rothbard
Post #77,599 by kmself 1/28/03 2:39:43 PM Reply	It's a free market \r\n When it was necessary to migrate from the DOS/Network version (the new 32-bit\r\nrecompile to support XP/2000 was way too slow compared to the 16-bit version),\r\nwe set up the Linux host version with terminal emulation. The client already had\r\nbeen using a Linux Samba server running Caldera Linux. \r\n\r\n When Data Pro found out we were on Caldera, they flat out refused to honor a\r\npaid-up support contract because it wasn't on Red Hat. \r\n\r\n Software companies will grasp any straw to deny support. I've even had them deny\r\nsupport for database problems because we were using a different terminal\r\nemulator than they recommend. They said that had to be the cause of the data\r\nindexing problem. \r\n \r\n\r\n There are ISVs who'll pull this shit. This creates a market for both\r\nother proprietary ISVs to do a better job of managing the support issue,\r\nor for service-oriented companies to build an enterprise out of\r\nsupporting free software solutions. It'll shake out. \r\n\r\n There are lots of people who do lots of things. Darwin will sort 'em\r\nout. \r\n\r\n ObLRPD: It's a bunch of RVs, yurts, tepees, and geodesic domes set up\r\nin a field and organized by consensus. \r\n\r\n --\r\n Karsten M. Self [link\|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com\|kmself@ix.netcom.com]\r\n [link\|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/\|http://kmself.home.netcom.com/]\r\n What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?\r\n [link\|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/\|TWikIWETHEY] -- an experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.\r\n \r\n Keep software free. Oppose the CBDTPA. Kill S.2048 dead.\r\n[link\|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html\|http://www.eff.org/alerts/20020322_eff_cbdtpa_alert.html]\r\n

Welcome to IWETHEY!